If nothing else, the administration has lied, repeatedly and done everything they could to deflect, disown and dodge criticism for it's
handling of the death of Stevens.
Part 1 is 2 1/2 hours and not much to hear but watch part 2 and it will be obvious to anyone that we have been fed a load of horse manure by the white
house.

It's getting even better.
It seems the House Armed Services Committee chairman, Rep. Buck McKeown isn't able to getting any answers from serving military personnel:

"We’re not getting anything. I have written to commanders in the field, 3-, 4-star admirals and generals, and the response I got out of the
Department of Defense is that “we will not be able to answer your simple yes and no questions,” that I’m sure they already know the answers to.
“We will not be able to answer them on your timeline (which was now a couple of weeks ago when I wrote the letter), and we do not know when we’ll
be able to respond.”

"And the other requests that we’ve asked for briefings, “we will not be able to comply with.” This is the first time I’ve seen where the
military has been basically silenced, when they could not answer a direct yes and no question from the chairman of the House Armed Services
Committee".

"The one who knows it all, that could clear it all up, is out campaigning and is totally silent on the issue after telling us he wants us to have all
the information as soon as he receives it".

Truman fired MacArthur when he decided that America was not going to risk a general war with China and likely Russia by leaving an insubordinate
commander in place. Whether he was right or wrong to do so is debatable, but the removal of officers who are not trusted is just common sense if you
are the commander in chief.

I, personally, realized that once the CIA was as deeply involved as it appears to be then we would never know exactly what happened to the extent that
would suffice. I've generally given up on trying to find the who/what/where/why and instead focus on correcting or suggesting alternative
explanations or factual occurrences. One example would be to squash the rumor that General Ham was fired for defying orders. It's a lie. So is the
idea that the president sat and watched the incident play itself out over the course of 11 hours.

I already said that I'm going with Occam's razor on this, I don't believe in the deep, dark conspiracies but I also am sure we'll never know the
full-extent of what occurred or didn't occur in Benghazi.

What's Bush got to do with this?
Or Iraq for that matter?
I still think Bush/Cheney/Powell should all be tried for war crimes over their role in Iraq so don't think this has anything to do with partisanship
on my part.
I loathe both parties equally!

MacArthur jumped on a plane and left his second in command to surrender the Philippines. He left the men under his command to walk the Death March,
while he hightailed it to safety. Was it the right thing to do? From a tactical stand point yes. But, soldiers don't care about the tactical stanpoint
when they are abandoned by their leadership. Something this administration might want to think about.

+edit - and if I'm not mistaken he was awarded the MoH for his defense of the Philippines. He ran and then received the nations highest honor for
bravery? That should be a thread by itself.

Not you, or anyone else publically, know whether or not the military was ordered to stand down. Without an investigation, we will never know. What
facts are known:

The most powerful commander of American forces in the MENA was suddenly announced to be stepping down early from the position and putting in early
retirement, weeks after the Libya fiasco.
An admiral was relieved from duty in mid-deployment at one of the most dangerous places on earth. Something that hasn't happened in twenty years.

The president, and his staff have been caught flat out lying over what they knew and when they knew it. Claiming to be in the dark over a spontaneous
mob action when in fact they had received prior warnings an attack was coming, and had watched the attack unfold live on drone video for SEVEN HOURS.
Rather then admit it was a planned terrorist attack, they spent weeks scapegoating a dupe, who was jailed, not to mention tried to springboard it into
an excuse to shutdown free speech on the internet. After the fact, BHO tried to say he had ordered all available forces to respond, yet BHO's own
Panetta said no action was taken because it was too dangerous.
These are the admitted facts and documented events.

Which is it? knew it was terror or not? issued orders or no orders given? The most powerful military on earth took no action even though BHO said
orders were given. Because they were incompetent? insubordinate? because orders were never given? or because the orders were to stand down?

The whole dog ate our homework excuse has been blown to pieces. BHO knew what happened, while it was happening. The question is what did he do, or not
do, and why. If this is a conspiracy-truth site, why are you waving the big "move along, nothing to see" sign?

The whole situation based on the known facts stinks. The only question is whether its coming from incompetence, or conspiracy.

This is just one more sad example in a very long list over the past 4 years that the White House agenda has nothing to do with America or her
interests. It will be interesting to see how they wiggle out of this one.

This will be a classic example of "blow-back" and I think the content of the enclosed article goes well beyond mere conjecture and idle speculation.
Some predictions as they relate to momentous events such as Benghazi-Gate oftentimes bear a sense of the ominous - of foreboding. The predicative
speculation contained within this article certainly fits the description of an omen; a prediction, or a presentiment of great import, especially of a
coming political and military upheaval - possibly even the portent of martial law.

November 4, 2012 - The United States military is in a state of war in the Middle East and President Obama has committed the
unprecedented action of firing two senior level command officers for what would comprise the leadership of an attack force against Iran and
potentially China and Russia. This action is so unprecedented, so reckless, that it is difficult to comprehend. Please allow me to offer a sports
analogy in order to explain the magnitude of this action. Imagine that your favorite football was on the eve of the Super Bowl and the owner of your
team fired both the head coach and the quarterback the night before the big game. Wouldn’t this throw your team into a state of disarray? Of course
it would, and subsequently your team would face annihilation. This is exactly the case with our forces in the Middle East after the firing of these
two military leaders at this critical point in time. The deposing and subsequent arrest of AFRICOM commanding officer, General Carter Ham, and the
firing of Carrier task force commander, Admiral Charles M. Gayouette is an irresponsible move by the Obama administration and has left a leadership
void in the Middle East that has needlessly put the lives of our military at risk.
The positions held by Hamm and Gayouette are so powerful and so sensitive, their replacements will require approval from the Senate. Why would Obama
engage in such a reckless act when the country is so close to war? Very simply, both men were jointly attempting to rescue Ambassador Stevens and his
bodyguards, despite being told to stand down by Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta. There is now proof that Obama was warned in advance of the coming
attack in which Stevens begged for more protection and his impassioned plea was denied by Clinton.

If there is a Coup coming, it will only be if Obummer wins the POTUS vote again. He is not a Leader of Men, but a Destroyer of Righteousness and
Bringer of Chaos. As Commander in Chief, he failed to provide protection of our Constitution, our People and our Country. He has committed treason in
my opinion by giving aid and comfort to our enemies, by consorting with those who seek to destroy America and its way of life. This in the eyes of any
military man or woman is not right. That is not what we took an oath to give up our lives for in defense of our country and its principle beliefs.

The most powerful commander of American forces in the MENA was suddenly announced to be stepping down early from the position and putting in early
retirement, weeks after the Libya fiasco. An admiral was relieved from duty in mid-deployment at one of the most dangerous places on earth. Something
that hasn't happened in twenty years.

It was announced in June that General Ham would be replaced. As far as the Admiral? We have not heard anything other than 'well so and so said'.

The president, and his staff have been caught flat out lying over what they knew and when they knew it.

That was part of the initial intel and not an unreasonable assumption IMO. This part is the least important in my opinion. A terrorist attack is a
terrorist attack.

and had watched the attack unfold live on drone video for SEVEN HOURS.

A drone was not capturing live video for the whole 7 hour ordeal.

not to mention tried to springboard it into an excuse to shutdown free speech on the internet.

Free speech on the internet has been and will remain under threat but it has nothing to do with that video. Obama and anyone else from the
adminstration that have spoken of it, have specifically stated that the video is protected speech and the video should not be used as an excuse to
commit violence nor would such an excuse ever be justified in 'our' eyes.

After the fact, BHO tried to say he had ordered all available forces to respond, yet BHO's own Panetta said no action was taken because it was too
dangerous.

Do you have a quote for that?

None of us were there on the ground in the area or in any rooms where decisions were being made. I'm not a fan of Obama but I'm not willing to
believe FOX tripe to justify my anger with our President. I believe it probably would have been a much bigger disaster had we sent a military
response. Instead of four Americans dead at the hands of terrorists we may have had dozens as a result of friendly fire.

If this is a conspiracy-truth site, why are you waving the big "move along, nothing to see" sign?

This site is much more than a conspiracy site, and regardless that is no excuse to swallow BS just because it appeals to some conspiracy fantasy.
However, the fact that this consulate was being used by the CIA tells me two things. One, we will never, ever know what the hell was going on there
and two it was probably kept to skeletal security for a reason.

what ??
i should know better than to feed a troll but what about dhs.gov is a blog ???
what about FEMA is a blog ?
please pick a source and i'd bet i can find a story about it.
you really need to learn how things work around here.

not sure where the 11hrs comes from but he sure had a minimum of 6.5hrs, as it's been reported the drone was onsite at 5:11p EST.

as for Gen Ham, he was relieved of duty, that's a fact.
i'm not arguing the arrested/apprehended part cause we'll never know.
i can say this, it doesn't appear Gen Ham was planning his abrupt departure.

as for how the ball bounces ... you might want to review
[url=http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/11/02/Ex-SEAL-Obama-Never-Gave-Cross-Border-Authority-Orders-To-Aid-Americans-Under-Siege-In-Libya]this[/
url]
since i don't recall ORs opinion, would you mind linking it ?

i'm still not sure if there will be enough reprocussions over this incident, however, rather defending any aspect that says Obama gave an order
(stand down or not), perhaps we should be considering the opposite instead ?

as i am not military or privy to such policy, i was advised of "standing orders" vs CBA (cross-border authority) which can only be provided by POTUS
and appears to be absent in this incident.
for those who want to know more, read
[url=http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/11/02/Ex-SEAL-Obama-Never-Gave-Cross-Border-Authority-Orders-To-Aid-Americans-Under-Siege-In-Libya]this[/
url].

As soon as terrorists attacked the U.S. consulate in Libya, dozens of headquarters -- including AFRICOM and EUROCOM -- are notified so they can
begin their planning for rescue operations, but, as Braken writes, [color=amber] "there is one thing they can’t do without explicit orders from the
president: cross an international border on a hostile mission."
- snip -

We can be 100% certain that cross-border authority was never given. How do I know this? Because if CBA was granted and the rescue
mission execute orders were handed down, irrefutable records exist today in at least a dozen involved component commands, and probably many more.

- snip -
Americans on the ground were ready and able to help Stevens and the other Americans who were under siege in Libya, but Obama never gave them the
"cross-border authority" required for them to do so, which meant U.S. resources stationed on the ground in the region -- and U.S. drones and
gunships in the area -- were never used.

do i trust the word of an x-seal over a politician or reporter ???
yes and on any day of the year.

Actually, Ham is a really good man, according to my husband, who actually worked under him at one point. Yes, he will be missed.

This...man...in the White House is NOT a friend of the military, no matter what he claims in his speech tonight. Military families struggle to get
by, and he claims they won't have to. The military has been weakened by his policies, and he claims to make it stronger.

Yes, the writing is on the wall, and NOTHING he does would surprise me at this stage. Expect something big, and nothing good for this doomed nation.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.